Soren wrote on Nov 10^th, 2011 at 7:55pm:

Don't over-egg it.

While Australia is somewhat in the habit of lecturing other states (particularly Indonesia) that this nation is a paragon of higher. better, more noble values and practices than anyone else, we have (for example) also stood firm against (among many other things) our opposition to the death penalty (nothing ignoble about that) and lived those values here as we would expect (or ask) of others.

In the case of Indonesian minors caught with alleged smugglers, Australia must apply more rigorous vigilance and creditable methods in its process of determining their claims of minority... Not impossible to do, as action groups acting for these minors have proved.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Nov 11^th, 2011 at 6:43am:



You can only exopext Australia to take greater care of Indonesian minors if you think Australia is better morally, legally, socially etc than Indonesia.
And if Australia (and the west) is better, then lectutring and reprimanding third worlders who are not in our league is OK.

In other words, if we set a higher standard for ourselves, we must not defer to those ho are happy witheir own lower standards.

This is the paradox, not the particular case of indonesian minors. That's  just an a propos illustration of the progressivist, multicultural paradox. To illustrate the paradox another way:


In the summer of 1881, when King Kalakaua of Hawaii, visiting England, was invited to a dinner party at which the Prince of Wales (that is, the future King Edward VII) was also to be present. The prince insisted that King Kalakaua should take precedence in the seating arrangements over the crown prince of Germany, who was his own brother-in-law and the future Kaiser. To back up his insistence, Bertie offered the following flawless gem of imperial logic: "Either the brute is a king, or he's a common or garden black person; and if the latter, what's he doing here?"

freediver wrote on Nov 12^th, 2011 at 10:23am:

The hypocrisy is based on our general commitment to safeguarding the rights and special needs of those we consider minors (particularly our own) on the one hand and our misuse of discredited technology to refute the claims of those Indonesians who claim to be minors on the other.

You have tried page after page to deflect the argument back to my personal belief regarding the foreknowledge, intent and agency of Indonesian minors to act in the capacity of adult smugglers.

freediver wrote on Nov 12^th, 2011 at 3:53pm:

A better technology.... Like, say, the one the minors' advocates deployed to confirm their minority?

freediver wrote on Nov 12^th, 2011 at 9:54pm:

So cynical.

Maybe the Australian authorities should refer the case to asylum seeker advocates... They seem to have had a bit of success in confirming the age of minors.

Wrist X rays have been discredited as a means of determining age with the accuracy required... Can easily be out by up to 4 years.

freediver wrote on Nov 13^th, 2011 at 12:13pm:

By the confirmation of their clients claims of minority, of course.

freediver wrote on Nov 13^th, 2011 at 12:13pm:

They may as well use a ouija board.

When it comes to Indonesian fishing village minors who have been working hard manual labour for years by the time they're 14, the discredited wrist x-ray is highly likely to produce an inaccurate result.

freediver wrote on Nov 13^th, 2011 at 5:08pm:

The only good thing about your descent into asking mindless questions is that it keeps this thread current beyond this forum.

Wrist X-rays for determining exact age is not reliable and has been discredited... It can estimate age to within 4 years. That is a fact.

Quote:


http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/indon-boy-allegedly-sexually-abuse...